Force without War: U.S. Armed Forces as a Political Instrument
Force without War: U.S. Armed Forces as a Political Instrument
复制标题
没有战争的武力：美国武装部队作为政治工具
DOI：
10.2307/448022
复制
发表时间：
1979
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Stephen S. Kaplan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Andrew J. Pierre;B. Blechman;Stephen S. Kaplan
自第二次世界大战以来，美国在许多场合和世界许多地区使用非战争军事力量作为外交工具。这本书描述和分析了伴随215次武力展示的情况，并研究了这些行动在帮助实现美国外交政策目标方面的有效性。哪种类型的部队（空军、陆军、海军）最常使用？这些部队做了什么，效果如何？当美国军事力量被要求影响事件时，苏联的介入有什么意义？战略核力量的警戒或部署或非常庞大的常规力量所构成的威胁是否特别能说明问题？一个预期的效果实际上是由武力的展示引起的，这一点有多清楚？巴里·布莱克曼和斯蒂芬·卡普兰探讨了这些问题和其他问题，还研究了导致美国军事示威的危机之前或期间总统在国内的受欢迎程度和个人外交等因素。五组案例研究对他们的分析进行了补充，描述了美国使用军事力量影响中欧和东欧、中东、南亚和东南亚以及加勒比地区事件的十个实例。大卫K.霍尔，威廉B。Quandt，杰罗姆N.放大图片作者：斯莱特Slusser和Philip Windsor专注于美国行动的原因和采取的方法，其他各方的行为以及使用武力与解决危机之间的关系。这本书的主要结论是，美国武装力量的示范性使用往往足以稳定恶化的局势，以避免进一步恶化，减轻国内和国际压力，采取更激烈的行动，并可能弄巧成拙，并为外交赢得时间，以实现更持久的补救措施。"
The United States has used military force short of war as an instrument of diplomacy on many occasions and in many areas of the world in the years since the Second World War. This book describes and analyzes the circumstances accompanying 215 shows of force and examines how effective these actions were in helping to attain U.S. foreign policy objectives. Which type of force (air, ground, naval) was most often used? What did the forces do and how effective were they? Of what significance was Soviet involvement when U.S. military power was called upon to influence events? Was the threat presented by the alerting or deployment of strategic nuclear forces or by very large conventional forces especially telling? How clear is it that a desired effect was in fact caused by the demonstration of force? Barry Blechman and Stephen Kaplan explore these and other questions, examining also such elements as a President's domestic popularity and personal diplomacy preceding or during crises that led to U.S. military demonstrations. Complementing their analysis are five sets of case studies describing ten instances of the use of American military power to influence events in Central and Eastern Europe, the Middle East, South and Southeast Asia, and the Caribbean. The case studiesby David K. Hall, William B. Quandt, Jerome N. Slater, Robert M. Slusser, and Philip Windsorfocus on the reasons for U.S. action and the methods adopted, on the behavior of other parties, and on the relation between the use of force and the resolution of the crisis. The book's main conclusion is that the demonstrative use of U.S. armed forces has often stabilized a deteriorating situation enough to avoid further deterioration, relieved domestic and international pressure for more drastic and possibly self-defeating action, and gained time for diplomacy to achieve a more lasting remedy."